Jump to content

Trump is getting impeached!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Olivaw said:

 

It's probably difficult to accept that their boy screwed up bigly. Let's let them work their way through the process. 

 

 

 

So, the impeachment hearings will lay out all the crimes Trump committed. Worse, the violation of his oath of office to protect our nation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

I know. Hildabeast got slayed when she was thought to be invincible, and you and those like you will do anything to get even.

 

You're sick!

 

Yes sixxy. I thought Hilary would win and she lost. I was wrong

 

Are you trying to hurt my feelings?  Are you lashing out at me because you are upset about this nasty business with Ukraine? I certainly understand. You'll feel better soon and we can have an adult conversation it. Perhaps not today, but one day. 

 

Feel better. :) 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olivaw said:

It's probably difficult to accept that their boy screwed up bigly.

 

What did he do wrong? Follow the law signed by President Clinton to cooperate with Ukraine in criminal investigations?

 

Oh, you swallowed that thick gooey load that Schiff pumped down your throat, the cut-and-paste piecemeal version of a phone call between diplomatic allies, meant to purposefully disparage Trump.

 

Hahaha. I truly pity you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, leftwinger said:

 

So, the impeachment hearings will lay out all the crimes Trump committed. Worse, the violation of his oath of office to protect our nation.

The Governor of NY just said that the impeachment is going nowhere!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olivaw said:

Are you trying to hurt my feelings?  Are you lashing out at me because you are upset about this nasty business with Ukraine?

 

No, I shouldn't want to hurt your feelings. Let's start over. I like you. I should be nicer to you.

 

So, two things stick out to me. One, the US has had a longstanding agreement with Ukraine that was signed into law by President Clinton to cooperate in criminal investigations. To me that means Trump was following the law. Two, we know that the "whistleblower" was giving a hear-say account (which would be inadmissible in court and for good reason; it's unfair to the accused), and that the rules were changed within days of the complaint to allow second-hand accounts, which would have previously been rejected.

 

Given these two FACTS that are well-documented, it appears to me Trump did nothing wrong, and that he is being set up by his adversaries.

 

Can you see it that way?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, leftwinger said:

 

So, the impeachment hearings will lay out all the crimes Trump committed. Worse, the violation of his oath of office to protect our nation.

 

Since I seem to be admitting past mistakes, I'll admit that I was wrong about impeachment when I argued that Democrats should avoid the impeachment process.  New evidence has come forward and Trump's wrongdoing needs to be examined in the context of a formal impeachment hearing and likely trial. Moscow Mitch previously promised that there would be a trial if the House votes articles of impeachment. It's probably time for the formal process. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Olivaw said:

 

Since I seem to be admitting past mistakes, I'll admit that I was wrong about impeachment when I argued that Democrats should avoid the impeachment process.  New evidence has come forward and Trump's wrongdoing needs to be examined in the context of a formal impeachment hearing and likely trial. Moscow Mitch previously promised that there would be a trial if the House votes articles of impeachment. It's probably time for the formal process. 

 

Well said! Can't add anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

 

Since I seem to be admitting past mistakes, I'll admit that I was wrong about impeachment when I argued that Democrats should avoid the impeachment process.  New evidence has come forward and Trump's wrongdoing needs to be examined in the context of a formal impeachment hearing and likely trial. Moscow Mitch previously promised that there would be a trial if the House votes articles of impeachment. It's probably time for the formal process. 

LMFAO are you sticking with that story? Get ready for another big nothing burger!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

No, I shouldn't want to hurt your feelings. Let's start over. I like you. I should be nicer to you.

 

So, two things stick out to me. One, the US has had a longstanding agreement with Ukraine that was signed into law by President Clinton to cooperate in criminal investigations. To me that means Trump was following the law. Two, we know that the "whistleblower" was giving a hear-say account (which would be inadmissible in court and for good reason; it's unfair to the accused), and that the rules were changed within days of the complaint to allow second-hand accounts, which would have previously been rejected.

 

Given these two FACTS that are well-documented, it appears to me Trump did nothing wrong, and that he is being set up by his adversaries.

 

Can you see it that way?

 

I was just messing with you. I recently returned from a long trip to UK. Over there, people enjoy "taking the piss" out of each other. It's not a bad way to explore political differences while maintaining a sense of joviality.

 

The US does have a longstanding agreement to cooperate but in this case the investigation already found that there was no wrongdoing on the part of Hunter Biden. Moreover, the claim that Joe Biden was somehow responsible for the firing of the old prosecutor is simply not supported by the evidence. That prosecutor was fired because he himself was considered to be corrupt. Most of the pressure to fire him came from Europe. (At the time, Ukraine was exploring closer ties to Europe with an eye to possible participation in the EU. Europe consistently pressures those who wish to join the EU to tackle corruption. It demanded the same of Romania and other countries before they were admitted to the EU).

 

The matter was settled to the satisfaction of everybody except Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani. 

 

In that context, Trump's request to reinstate a corrupt prosecutor and to reopen a closed investigation comes across as a transparent attempt to get Ukraine to launch an unnecessary investigation into an American political opponent. Surely you recognize that this is unacceptable behavior. 

 

You're right. The whistle blower complaint is based on hearsay. It is inadmissible in a court of law (though there is some question as to it's admissibility in an impeachment trial). However we are not at that point yet. We are at beginning the investigation and hearsay is acceptable grounds for an investigation. That becomes particularly true when the credibility of the whistle blower complaint is supported by the evidence in the transcript.

 

Trump's promise to involve his personal lawyer was somewhat irregular. His promised to involve the AG was highly irregular. 

 

Don't you agree that it is worth looking into? It certainly seems as serious as lying about an affair with an intern in a blue dress. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Duck615 said:

LMFAO are you sticking with that story? Get ready for another big nothing burger!!

 

If I enjoyed the same hobby as Kfools, I would add your post to my database in the hope of one day throwing the nothing burger comment back in your face. :) Please tell kfools that I don't consider it a nothing burger. 

 

Are you going to accuse me of homosexual acts now, Duck? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump can do more damage than Nixon. His impeachment is imperative
By Robert Reich

 

The difference between Richard Nixon’s abuse of power (trying to get dirt on political opponents to help with his 1972 re-election, and then covering it up) and Donald Trump’s abuse (trying to get Ukraine’s president to get dirt on a political opponent to help with his 2020 reelection, and then covering it up) isn’t just that Nixon’s involved a botched robbery at the Watergate while Trump’s involves a foreign nation.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/28/donald-trump-richard-nixon-impeachment-robert-reich

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

 

If I enjoyed the same hobby as Kfools, I would add your post to my database in the hope of one day throwing the nothing burger comment back in your face. :) Please tell kfools that I don't consider it a nothing burger. 

 

Are you going to accuse me of homosexual acts now, Duck? 

we already know all about your sexual orientation!!! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

 

I was just messing with you. I recently returned from a long trip to UK. Over there, people enjoy "taking the piss" out of each other. It's not a bad way to explore political differences while maintaining a sense of joviality.

 

The US does have a longstanding agreement to cooperate but in this case the investigation already found that there was no wrongdoing on the part of Hunter Biden. Moreover, the claim that Joe Biden was somehow responsible for the firing of the old prosecutor is simply not supported by the evidence. That prosecutor was fired because he himself was considered to be corrupt. Most of the pressure to fire him came from Europe. (At the time, Ukraine was exploring closer ties to Europe with an eye to possible participation in the EU. Europe consistently pressures those who wish to join the EU to tackle corruption. It demanded the same of Romania and other countries before they were admitted to the EU).

 

The matter was settled to the satisfaction of everybody except Donald Trump and Rudy Giuliani. 

 

In that context, Trump's request to reinstate a corrupt prosecutor and to reopen a closed investigation comes across as a transparent attempt to get Ukraine to launch an unnecessary investigation into an American political opponent. Surely you recognize that this is unacceptable behavior. 

 

You're right. The whistle blower complaint is based on hearsay. It is inadmissible in a court of law (though there is some question as to it's admissibility in an impeachment trial). However we are not at that point yet. We are at beginning the investigation and hearsay is acceptable grounds for an investigation. That becomes particularly true when the credibility of the whistle blower complaint is supported by the evidence in the transcript.

 

Trump's promise to involve his personal lawyer was somewhat irregular. His promised to involve the AG was highly irregular. 

 

Don't you agree that it is worth looking into? It certainly seems as serious as lying about an affair with an intern in a blue dress. 

 

No problem, I mess with everyone here but there are a few I like and you're one. Not that that matters to you, but I do have a couple leftist members who I can discuss with rationally and it's nice to have those few. I'm gonna work on befriending Scout and Splunch! too, I've taken somewhat of a shine to them too.

 

But I digress. You are more knowledgeable than myself on the details but I disagree that there were only two people still concerned about Biden's involvement vis-a-vis Hunter's employment. I think THAT is worth looking into, unless as you say it's a settled matter. And if Trump had good reason to think it was NOT settled (let's admit he has access to more data than we do) and still a concern, then he was acting lawfully.

 

And you didn't address the issue that the rules for whistleblower complaints were changed within days of the complaint, and that Schiff's tweets during that same period seem incredibly suspicious. I think THAT should be looked into, don't you?

 

Lying to Congress under oath is a crime. The subject matter is irrelevant. Are you implying Clinton's lie wasn't "bad enough"?? He's lucky he didn't go to jail, most others would and have.

 

What CRIME did Trump commit in the phone call??

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

No problem, I mess with everyone here but there are a few I like and you're one. Not that that matters to you, but I do have a couple leftist members who I can discuss with rationally and it's nice to have those few. I'm gonna work on befriending Scout and Splunch! too, I've taken somewhat of a shine to them too.

 

But I digress. You are more knowledgeable than myself on the details but I disagree that there were only two people still concerned about Biden's involvement vis-a-vis Hunter's employment. I think THAT is worth looking into, unless as you say it's a settled matter. And if Trump had good reason to think it was NOT settled (let's admit he has access to more data than we do) and still a concern, then he was acting lawfully.

 

And you didn't address the issue that the rules for whistleblower complaints were changed within days of the complaint, and that Schiff's tweets during that same period seem incredibly suspicious. I think THAT should be looked into, don't you?

 

Lying to Congress under oath is a crime. The subject matter is irrelevant. Are you implying Clinton's lie wasn't "bad enough"?? He's lucky he didn't go to jail, most others would and have.

 

What CRIME did Trump commit in the phone call??

 

 

 

I too consider you to be among the conservatives here with whom it is possible to have a rational and enjoyable discussion. I count ChairmanOTB and a few others in that small group. 

 

The matter of Biden appeared to be settled in that no evidence of wrongdoing was uncovered, I have no objection to Biden's political opponents attempting further opposition research on it. Indeed, if there is dirt to be dug then by all means dig it up. A president needs to be able to survive the dirt that is dug, otherwise he (or she) is not ready to be president. 

 

I'm a little unclear as to the relevance of the rule change. Google took me to RedState which said that the rules change in August 2019. It suggests that the change was authorized by Trump's own Inspector General. Is there a working hypothesis that the US IG is part of a plot to take down Trump?  Isn't it equally feasible that the IG changed the rule to allow him to continue his investigation into Democrats. 

 

Please clarify what you mean by Schiff's tweets. 

 

Wasn't the justification for Clinton's impeachment that he lied to Kenneth Starr about an affair with Monica Lewisnky?  Yes, I suppose I am saying that it was not a terribly serious lie because he lied about something that was unimportant to the country. His impeachment therefore came across as a process in search of a crime. 

 

You might be able to argue that the possible impeachment of Trump would be a process in search of a crime too. The alleged crime - if true - would be a serious abuse of office and misuse of American funds to force a foreign government to do his personal dirty work. Some scholars say it was a crime. Others say it was not. Most say it is serious.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

 

I too consider you to be among the conservatives here with whom it is possible to have a rational and enjoyable discussion. I count ChairmanOTB and a few others in that small group. 

 

The matter of Biden appeared to be settled in that no evidence of wrongdoing was uncovered, I have no objection to Biden's political opponents attempting further opposition research on it. Indeed, if there is dirt to be dug then by all means dig it up. A president needs to be able to survive the dirt that is dug, otherwise he (or she) is not ready to be president. 

 

I'm a little unclear as to the relevance of the rule change. Google took me to RedState which said that the rules change in August 2019. It suggests that the change was authorized by Trump's own Inspector General. Is there a working hypothesis that the US IG is part of a plot to take down Trump?  Isn't it equally feasible that the IG changed the rule to allow him to continue his investigation into Democrats. 

 

Please clarify what you mean by Schiff's tweets. 

 

Wasn't the justification for Clinton's impeachment that he lied to Kenneth Starr about an affair with Monica Lewisnky?  Yes, I suppose I am saying that it was not a terribly serious lie because he lied about something that was unimportant to the country. His impeachment therefore came across as a process in search of a crime. 

 

You might be able to argue that the possible impeachment of Trump would be a process in search of a crime too. The alleged crime - if true - would be a serious abuse of office and misuse of American funds to force a foreign government to do his personal dirty work. Some scholars say it was a crime. Others say it was not. Most say it is serious.

 

Fair enough, thanks for the reply. 

 

Clinton lied to our FACES on national TV. That was not a crime, but speaks VOLUMES to his character. Strike that, irrelevant. :D

 

As to "misuse of American funds to force ... " there is information out that the funds were not even delayed/withheld until a month after the call, and why didn't Zelensky even MENTION it??

 

As to the matter of the rule change, I refer to you another thread that you might have missed with a lot of information. IMO it is EXTREMELY relevant, especially in light of Schiff's Twitter activity:

 

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/271551-heres-proof-the-whistleblower-is-a-set-up-by-the-anti-trump-intelligence-community/

 

Surely you realize there are dastardly characters on the left.....? who want to destroy Trump at any cost?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

Fair enough, thanks for the reply. 

 

Clinton lied to our FACES on national TV. That was not a crime, but speaks VOLUMES to his character. Strike that, irrelevant. :D

 

As to "misuse of American funds to force ... " there is information out that the funds were not even delayed/withheld until a month after the call, and why didn't Zelensky even MENTION it??

 

As to the matter of the rule change, I refer to you another thread that you might have missed with a lot of information. IMO it is EXTREMELY relevant, especially in light of Schiff's Twitter activity:

 

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/271551-heres-proof-the-whistleblower-is-a-set-up-by-the-anti-trump-intelligence-community/

 

Surely you realize there are dastardly characters on the left.....? who want to destroy Trump at any cost?

 

 

 

Thank you for the response. 

 

Bill Clinton - aka slick willie - worried me when he ran against Bush Sr. In fact (and Spycar Bill will go after me for this) I felt Bush Sr. deserved a second term. Yes, Bill Clinton lied to our faces when he said that he did not have sexual relations with that woman. Oral sex is sex, IMO. 

 

Reports about the funds are varied and it is early days yet. Reporting was that Trump personally withheld the funds until the conversation. There were also reports that Trump refused to speak with Zelensky until he agreed to include Biden in the discussion. If true (and that does remain an if) then it was a serious violation. 

 

I'll take a look at the other thread. My comment was based only on a quick reading of the  RedState article. It left me wondering why the IG would change the rules. 

 

We probably both recognize that politics is a ruthless sport. It attracts dastardly characters. It also brings out our lesser angels but most of us can keep it in perspective. Many Trump supporters chanted "lock her up" about  Clinton. Many Trump opponents want to see him behind bars. Most of us don't  want to see anybody destroyed. We want to see the best policies implemented. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...